Greenspan versus the Bond Market
"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced . . . [b]ut I know it when I see it . . . "
That statement, while possibly true, had no salutary effect, at least in terms of providing guidance to the legal community as to what is obscene. When it comes to providing counsel, the “I know when I see it” standard is a rather ambiguous one to apply. The now infamous pronouncement led to decades of confusion amongst the courts.
Which brings us to the Fed, and their metronomic approach to raising interest rates towards the so-called “neutral accommodation.” During yesterday’s congressional Q&A, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan was asked why the 30-year interest rates have not risen with shorter-term rates. Greenspan famously called it a “Conundrum.”
It was one of those rare instances where a bon mot enters the lexicon almost immediately. To that short list, right next to “Irrational Exuberance,” we shall now add the convoluted word “Conundrum.” We expect a book of the same title by a Yale economics professor to follow shortly.
But while everyone seems to be focused on the multi-syllabic expression for riddle, they may have missed the Fed Chief’s more intriguing comment. When asked what a more neutral level of accommodation might look like, the Fed Chair opined he would know it when he saw it.
It seems that “Neutral Accommodation” is the new obscenity.
Considering how transparent, measured and predictable the Fed has been in this tightening cycle, one wonders why the sudden reversion to obfuscation. As the Fed moved away from 40-year low rates, bonds have failed to keep pace. Rates are actually lower today then they were when the Fed first started tightening.
Perhaps the Greenspan has grown weary of being ignored by the bond market.
While the Fed Chief has many virtues, predicting what markets will do is not one of them: He’s been notoriously wrong on natural gas prices, equities, crude oil, and now bonds. If there is a disagreement about where interest rates are going to go between the Fed Chair and the Bond Market - the so-called conundrum - than that’s an easy bet to place.
My money is on the Bond market.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Greenspan versus the Bond Market:
Words like "measured" and "accomodative" have been used. Yet, the Mortgage Finance industry, developed and aggressively marketed variable-rate products, interest-only loans, and flexible home equity lines of Credit.
Wall Street investment bankers focused on issuing variable-rate corporate debt, while the “financial engineers” in structured financed set their sights on transforming $100s of billions of variable-rate and subprime mortgage loans into enticing collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), MBS, ABS, and myriad derivative products.
After the "warnings", an enormous amount of interest-rate hedging was put in place that was, in reality, untenable. Again, I would assert that the Fed’s warnings of higher rates and the market’s rational reaction (large-scale hedging and bearish speculating) assured either a self-reinforcing downward spiral in bond prices (spike in rates) or an unfolding major “squeeze,” a derivative unwind, and destabilizing drop in rates.
Much like in the NASDAQ 2000, we are now witnessing the latter....a short-squeeze and unwind of interest-rate hedges throughout the Credit market.
Posted by: Keyser Soze | Feb 17, 2005 11:01:56 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.